Error-tolerant image computer terminal

ABSTRACT

Today, increased efforts are made to provide users with people-machine data-processing interfaces which are as simple and comfortable as possible. Inputting is currently carried out in data-processing systems via host terminals and personal computers as well as via other peripherals, such as network computers. However, the real evolutionary leap has been the achievement of input by means of writing and speech recognition. Handwriting in particular is a form of expression with which people are familiar from childhood onwards and which, unlike speech, also produces documented proof of expression. However, handwriting suffers from two problems: first, when there are a number of different users, as is often the case with public information access of self-service apparatus, OCR-translation of handwriting is not based on the individual script, as is necessary for a high-quality OCR process and, second, a relatively complicated correction of a defective input is demanded of the user, which, as experience has shown, clearly decreases the acceptability of a system. The invention offers a defect-tolerant image terminal as a solution to these two problems. The user-individual script forms the basis of the OCR translation process in that, during use, the script is either also input via a magnetic card or chip card or is called up in the system—this can also be achieved by means of an identification which is printed on paper or OCR-translated at the outset. It is not essential for the user to make corrections, he merely has to check the correctness of the OCR translation. Hand-written entries which have not been correctly transformed can then either be corrected by the user and re-processed or the correction can be made at the destination by sending a message, via the corresponding control key, that correction is necessary.

DESCRIPTION

[0001] The invention comprises a terminal which in the manner of the faxapparatuses which are conventional nowadays, reads in items of imageinformation, effects conversion into codes by way of an OCR-unit,displays the result of that conversion immediately to the user of theterminal and thereby permits him upon detecting incorrect conversion ofhis items of text information into codes either to repeat the inputoperation or however also to send an input which is not correct to thetarget address in such a way that he informs the receiver about thedefectiveness of the conversion in order to permit manualpost-processing.

[0002] Unlike the input of commands or items of information on computerinstallations by making use of an alphanumeric keyboard and a displayscreen, which is still the predominant procedure nowadays, such inputscan also be implemented by way of written, more specifically manuscriptentries, on paper. The software for effecting the process for convertingwriting into codes is summed up by the term OCR (optical characterrecognition). It identifies a well-documented discipline which includesprocesses and procedures, methods (feature recognition, patternrecognition), error tolerant interpolation processes (fuzzy logic) andtechnical aspects of data compression, optimisation of implementationtimes etc.

[0003] The technology of OCR however encounters natural limits whichexclude completely error-free results; on the one hand human handwritinghas script images which are individual to a person and on the other handit is not always unchanged even in relation to the same person, atdifferent times.

[0004] This represents a serious obstacle in regard to the use ofmanuscript or handwriting as an input instrument; even very low errorrates which will never be entirely eliminated hitherto made itimpossible to put such terminals to practical use. Otherwise in manycases, in particular in the area relating to simple everyday uses asoccur for example in the self-service sector in banks, such terminalswould already long ago have made greater inroads into use of theequipment of ‘keyboard and display screen’. The psychological advantageof handwriting input is also that the input medium, that is to say theform, remains in the hands of the user in its original as a physicalevidence and documentation of that which was communicated to the inputunit as a command.

[0005] In order to illustrate the hitherto state of the art, insofar asit is to be deemed useful for comprehension of the present invention, abrief outline of the development of input peripheral units will be setforth. The Seventies were in the sign of the large computers to whichinputs or commands were communicated by way of ‘unintelligent’terminals. In the Eighties the Personal Computer began its triumphalmarch, a piece of equipment of high decentral intelligence, which wasalso very quickly used as a decentral peripheral unit and extensivelydisplaced the other terminals.

[0006] It is precisely in regard to that function however whichincreasingly gained in significance that the weaknesses and problems ofthe PC manifested themselves. The PC is basically both too complicatedand also too expensive just for communicating simple inputs and commandsto central computers (hosts and servers). In that respect, not onlyequipment supply costs but more also maintenance costs and also thelevel of obsolescence which is high due to fast system and productcycles play their part. As from about the year 1995 such realisationsled to the development of ‘lean clients’. The expectation is that theywill win through, for cost reasons, particularly in relation to simpleuses. More specifically, users are either not always in a position ornot always prepared to satisfy high demands in terms of operatingknow-how. In regard to everyday processes in the self-service sector andalso information access procedures, for example over the Internet, inthe long term simple processes involving easy comprehensibility, simplehandling and rapid implementation will win through. Even users who areaccustomed to more complicated operating procedures, for example on aPC, will prefer the simpler technology if the straightforward use of theapplication is the foreground consideration and not the play componentof operation which is also inherent in the PC, if therefore there is arealistic weighing-up of cost and use.

[0007] These experiences and realisations resulted in recent years intwo evolutionary developments. On the one hand, the symbol-orientedgraphic user interface together with an expansion of the keyboard byvirtue of mouse operation, in the meantime the virtually monopoly domainof Microsoft. Secondly, the development of so-called ‘lean clients’ as asimpler and in particular less expensive alternative to everincreasingly high-capacity decentral computers, that is to say PCs.

[0008] Today, in the strategically crucial area of informationtechnology, the man-machine interface, we are faced with revolutionarydevelopments, more specifically communication of man with machine by wayof speech and also by way of handwriting. On a world-wide basis, greatendeavours are being undertaken to achieve advances in this area -nonetheless an interface design which is as user-close as possible willafford a quantum leap in many application areas.

[0009] Speech and handwriting input can be viewed as equivalentprocesses, even if each has its own different advantages anddisadvantages and therefore application areas which are rathercomplementary. In regard to preferences for the two methods, there is amarked difference: while in European and American research anddevelopment, the talk is exclusively of ‘speech input’, the Japaneseelectrical and electronic industry is targeted predominantly on ‘writinginput technology’. That reflects cultural differences. While in the Westa high level of affinity for abstract thought prevails, which devotesitself to virtual space, Japanese thinking is more concrete andpractice-oriented and more remote from theory. A significant economicconsequence thereof was the fact that the fax apparatus was developed inEurope but taken up in Japan and from there was made into a world-widemarket success.

[0010] Virtually all known patents in the field of writing processingare Japanese, more specifically for many years now, from theintroduction of the fax apparatus. It may be that this Japanesedominance, this advance in development, was also a reason why Westernresearch fell back into the area of speech and ‘writing recognition’ isnot a theme that is involved there. The converse is not the case. Thereis greatly advanced Japanese research and development in the field of‘speech recognition’, and for that reason it must also be reckoned thatthis technology will first be applied in Japan; from the point of viewof its structure and its auditory aspects the Japanese language is manytimes easier to detect by machine than Western languages.

[0011] The most recent trend in development towards ‘lean clients’ incombination with handwriting process has directed Japanese research anddevelopment to a technology and equipment which would open up attractivepossible uses; the known fax unit, unused in its potential function as a‘lean’ input peripheral unit, transports writing and thus potentialcontrol commands or items of input information. In that case the writingor text can be converted into codes either at the transmission locationor at the target location, by means of OCR. If the conversion operationis moved into the target system, it would be possible for all presentdayfax apparatuses to perform world-wide the function of terminals and thusplay a part beside PCs or new but nonetheless conventional peripheralunits such as network computers.

[0012] The largest Japanese electrical group, Hitachi, has long beenexperimenting with mainframes which are intended to process writing ortext input of normal fax apparatuses and which would thus make each faxapparatus into an ‘answer-back fax apparatus’. An obstacle in terms ofexploitation of licences however is thought to have been the experiencethat the defectiveness of OCR-conversion stands in the way of properoperational fitness. Prototypes produced by Western manufacturers, withthe option of correcting residual errors by way of a keyboard and adisplay screen on the other hand suffer from the point that this againinvolves a relapse to a lower level of input peripheral equipment andthus a limited degree of user acceptance.

[0013] A further process from Matsushita integrates a correctionkeyboard for OCR-conversion into a fax apparatus, but basically thisdoes not represent a substantial advance over pure keyboard (and displayscreen) input.

[0014] The development according to the invention of the present systemlies in a combination of a—apparently—difficult prerequisite for aqualitatively satisfactory OCR-process on the one hand and anorganisational innovation on the other hand which is made possible byvirtue of a technical arrangement. Both are described hereinafter.

[0015] Anyone who uses OCR-software knows that results which aresatisfactory to a certain extent can only be achieved when theindividual handwriting pattern of the user forms the basis for theOCR-process. The user firstly has to initialise the software by trainingit for his individual writing image or script. In the area of speechrecognition, that consideration is the primary content of research:acoustic training of the system with the individual manner of speakingof the user is of greatest importance for successful use.

[0016] In regard to writing processing also therefore the individualhandwriting pattern must be communicated to the system. In generaltherefore it will be necessary for each user to fill in by hand apattern form in order to use that pattern, which is individual to therespective person, for the OCR-program in the situation of use. In manyareas of use however it will be possible to derive that handwritingpattern from a large number of writing uses of a user and store same forthat person, for example in connection with bank remittances andtransactions.

[0017] The operation of calling up the customer-specific writing imagein the situation of use can be effected by way of a magnetic or chipcard, whether the writing pattern itself is stored thereon or thewriting pattern is called up with an identification number from thememory of the system hardware. The latter can also be effected by way ofthe account number which is printed on the form and which is firstsubjected to OCR-translation. This second alternative also representsthe single option for improving quality, which is available for theHitachi system.

[0018] The further technical-organisational innovation of the processthe subject-matter of the present invention provides that no obligatorycorrection of a possibly defective input is required from the user. Asecond working step, namely correction of the input, in whatever formthat may be, can be omitted, whereby the level of acceptance can becertainly substantially increased. The user is only required to checkthe printout of the OCR-translation of his manuscript form. In thepositive case, he will press the key ‘OK—execute’; if in contrast henotes a defective translation on the printed-out document, he will pressthe other key ‘error—execute after manual correction by systemoperator’. In that case, confirmation is printed out that the inputdeclared to be defective will also be subjected to post-processing inthe system. This second step in the invention could admittedly also beeffected without the first step of calling up the customer-individualwriting pattern, but there is then the fear that this will involve a hitrate which is unsatisfactory both for the customer and also for thesystem operator.

[0019] Further processing of erroneous or defective inputs which are notcorrected by the user is then implemented in a similar manner topresentday processing by virtue of manual input or subsequentprocedures, but here this is supported by the preliminary work which hasalready been done by the system: the human dealing with the processingoperation already has available the translation which in fact ispredominantly correct, and it will be possible to quickly discover andcorrect the error by comparison with the original.

[0020] In this process therefore achieving freedom from error which isrequired for the processing procedure is not necessarily a matter forthe user. This is important in terms of acceptance everywhere that thereis no motive for particular care or attention on the part of the user.In what fields and in relation to which situations of use it will bepossible also to require a user to deal with correction, besides a purechecking procedure which the user will still willingly undertake, andwhether and how that correction process is to be stimulated (for exampleby differences in terms of the charges involved), is a question ofsupplier-customer relationships, the situation in terms of competition,and marketing.

1. A fax apparatus for transmitting and receiving documents which inparticular have at least in part manuscript components, including ascanning unit for scanning the image information of a document to betransmitted, an OCR-unit for converting the scanned image informationinto codes, a transmitting unit for transmitting the codes which areconverted by the OCR-unit, a receiving unit for receiving transmitteddocuments and a printed unit for printing out documents, characterisedin that there is provided a writing image input and storage unit for theinput of user-individual writing images and for storage of theuser-individual writing images in suitable form, that there is provideda call-up unit for user-individual call-up of a user-individual writingimage in the writing image input and storage unit, that there is furtherprovided an intermediate storage means which stores the converted codeswhich are stored by the OCR-unit on the basis of the storeduser-individual writing image, that there is a data transmissionconnection between the OCR-unit and the printing unit so that the codesconverted back into image information again by the OCR-unit, immediatelyafter they have been produced and converted back, can be printed out bymeans of the printing unit, and that there is provided an erasing unitfor erasing the codes stored in the intermediate storage means and aconfirmation unit with which the codes stored in the intermediatestorage means can be called up from the intermediate storage means fortransmission by means of the transmitting unit.
 2. A fax apparatusaccording to claim 1 characterised in that the call-up unit is formed bya card reading unit for reading magnetic or chip cards.
 3. A faxapparatus according to claim 1 or claim 2 characterised in that there isprovided a display device for displaying the codes which are processedby the comparison and correction unit and converted back into items ofimage information again by the OCR-unit, immediately after they areproduced.
 4. A method of transmitting documents which in particular haveat least in part manuscript components, wherein the document is scannedby means of a scanning unit and the scanned image information isconverted into codes by means of an OCR-unit, wherein the codesconverted by the OCR-unit are transmitted by means of a transmittingunit, and wherein documents transmitted are received by means of areceiving unit and printed out by means of a printing unit,characterised in that prior to the transmission of documentsuser-individual handwritings are inputted and stored in suitable formand that conversion of the image information scanned by the scanningunit into codes is effected by means of the OCR-unit on the basis of thestored user-individual writing images and possibly corrected and thatthe codes converted by the OCR-unit and possibly corrected are thenconverted into image information again by the OCR-unit and printed outby means of the printing unit.
 5. A method according to claim 4characterised in that the stored user-individual writing image codes canbe called up by means of magnetic or chip cards.
 6. A method accordingto claim 4 or claim 5 characterised in that the codes which are producedby the OCR-unit on the basis of the user-individual writing image codesand converted back into items of image information again are displayedby means of a display device, immediately after they are produced.